I have a modest proposal that should lead to a more peaceful world and a less violent, more educated, better-led country:

Ban men from the voting booth.

Here’s my reasoning.

From the founding of the United States until 1920, the voting rights guaranteed by the Constitution applied only to men. How did that go? Even with the country’s tremendous economic growth and geographic expansion, it’s hard to overlook four score and seven years of slavery, a bloody civil war and shameful mistreatment of Native Americans and African-Americans.

After the First World War, the 19th Amendment was passed, extending equality at the polling place to women. So where do we find ourselves after almost a century of mixed gender voting? Saddled with a defective party system, dysfunctional Congress and directionless foreign policy.

The electoral choices made by male voters and then by men and women together fall short when measured against Jefferson’s promise of this country as “the world’s best hope.” My modest proposal then is to try the remaining formula: have only women vote.

How does that make sense? Well, first of all, American women seem to make better decisions than those of us afflicted with a Y-chromosome. You want an example? How about this. Women are incarcerated only 9 percent as often as men. That means women are either more law-abiding or smarter about not getting caught. Doesn’t matter, I’d rather have only the female constituency voting in either case.

The same reasoning applies to alcoholism. Fewer than half as many women are diagnosed with alcoholism as men. Women are either less likely to become inebriated or better able to hold their liquor. Either would bestow on them the wherewithal to make better decisions.

One more thing: Colleges and universities grant 50 percent more bachelor’s degrees to women than men. Women are just better educated. No surprise then that the female unemployment rate is lower.

So do smarts and sobriety and industry lead to better decisions? The answer appears to be in the affirmative. For a particularly topical example, nearly two-thirds of women favor banning assault weapons while only a minority of men do. In perhaps the worst foreign policy decision by the United States since the end of the Cold War, our troops invaded Iraq to remove Saddam Hussein from power. In a Gallup Poll five months before the invasion, women did not support an invasion; men did.

According to the Dec. 6-9, 2015 Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll, men are almost 1½ times more likely to view Donald Trump favorably than the opposite sex. That alone, some would argue, ought to disqualify American men from voting.

Should men still be able to hold office? Sure. If the newly modified, more intelligent electorate wants them in office, we can trust their judgment.

Let’s face the facts. Women make superior choices. But — perhaps through remedial help and affirmative action — could men be taught to make better ones? No. Men have had more than two centuries to prove themselves responsible voters. Enough already. Ban them from the voting booth.

Time to write, call, email, tweet, text or fax our representatives and senators in support of a 28th Amendment that will promulgate true women’s suffrage. Let’s stand up for our best shot at an American electorate that makes good decisions.

Keith Raffel of Palo Alto is a Harvard Law School graduate, former counsel to the Senate Intelligence Committee, former tech entrepreneur and current novelist writing thrillers, often with a Silicon Valley nod. He wrote this, tongue firmly in cheek, for this newspaper.

Our nation’s education secretary recently suggested that to prevent the next school massacre perhaps teachers should be permitted to carry guns. People took to social media to roar that many schools can’t even afford pencils, let alone armaments.